Kerala Court August 1994 Judgments
Binny Ltd. Vs. Regl. Poultry Officer and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-26-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ526; [1995(70)FLR736]; (1995)ILLJ99Ker
K.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act having its registered office at Madras with an office at Willingdon Island. In the year 1985, one R. Sobhana filed an application before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Quilon, alleging mat her husband, Babu Raj, met with an accident while employed by the petitioner in the work of loading and unloading of 'CARE feed' at the Regional Poultry Farm on December 2, 1983. First respondent herein was also impleaded as a party. Although notice was served on the respondents in the case it was not contested and finally the second respondent, Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, passed an award for realising an amount of Rs. 23,100 with interest thereon and directed the first respondent, the Regional Poultry Officer, to pay the amount to the claimant and further directed the petitioner herein to indemnify the Regional Poultry Officer under Section 12(2) of the Workmen's Compensation Act.2. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Elsykutty Devassia and ors. Vs. Jose and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-23-1994
Reported in: II(1995)ACC298; 1995ACJ364
K.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. In both these original petitions common questions are raised. Therefore, I dispose them of by a common judgment2. Petitioners were claimants before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. In both these cases, claim for compensation was in respect of the death of the husband of each of the first petitioner. Petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 are minors. Awards were passed in favour of the claimants. As petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 , were minors, compensation payable to them was apportioned and directed to be deposited in a nationalised bank. The first petitioner in each of the O.P. now contends that the interest payable on such deposit may be . ordered to be paid to the petitioners and that amount is required for the maintenance of the children. Application was filed before the M.A.C.T. In O.P. No. 10035 of 1994 vide Exh. P 3 order that claim was rejected and in O.P. No. 7807 of 1994 the very same claim was rejected by Exh. P 2 order. They are separately challenged in these original ...
Tag this Judgment!Beena Joseph Vs. Kerala State Insurance Department
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-23-1994
Reported in: I(1995)ACC4
K.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. In both the original petitions common questions are raised. Therefore, I dispose of them by a common judgment.2. Petitioners were claimants before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. In both these cases, claim for compensation was in respect of death of the husband of each of the first petitioner. Petitioners 2 to 4 are minors. Awards were passed in favour of the claimants. As petitioners 2 to 4 were minors, compensation payable to them was apportioned and directed to be deposited in a nationalised bank. The first petitioner in each of the O.P. now contends that the interest payable on such deposit may be ordered to be paid to the petitioners, and that amount is required for the maintenance of the children. Application was filed before the M.A.C.T. In O.P. 10035/94 vide Ext. P3 order that claim was rejected and in O.P. 7807/94 the very same claim was rejected by Ext. P2 order. They are separately challenged in this original petition.3. I heard the petitioner's C...
Tag this Judgment!The Life Insurance Corporation of India, Trivandrum Vs. Mrs. Prasanna ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-18-1994
Reported in: II(1995)ACC98; 1995ACJ577; AIR1995Ker88; [1995]82CompCas611(Ker)
Patnaik, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the defendant -- Life Insurance Corporation of India -- challenging the judgment of the learned Principal Sub Judge, Ernakulam dated 28-2-1987 in O.S. 139 of 1986, by which the defendant has been made liable to pay an assured sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-with interest and costs to the plaintiff as the nominee of her deceased husband, under an alleged contract of insurance,2. The plaintiff averred that her husband late T.N. Devaraj filled up the form of proposal for insurance on his life for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) -- Ext. B1(a) on 5-3-1982 and sent the same along with a cheque for Rs. 2625/- as the first premium to the Divisional Office of the Life Insurance Corporation of India, Trivandrum after getting himself medically examined by the doctors. The appellant accepted the proposal and encashed the cheque and acknowledged the same by granting the receipt dated 9-3-1982 (Ext. A1), (the office copy of which is marked as Ext. B1(c...
Tag this Judgment!Veerappan Vs. Muthamma
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-18-1994
Reported in: I(1995)ACC5; 1995ACJ313; (1999)IIILLJ451Ker
Pareed Pillay, J.1. Tahsildar, Peermade deposited Rs. 28,822/- as compensation due to the legal heirs of deceased Nallu. Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Kottayam apportioned the amount to the deceased's father, mother and widow as Rs. 12,322/-, Rs. 11,500/- and 5,000/- respectively. Parents of the deceased challenge the apportionment on the ground that the widow is not entitled to any amount as she has remarried.2. The only question that arises for consideration is whether re-marriage by the widow would disentitle her from claiming the amount of compensation.3. At the time when the Commissioner passed the order widow of the deceased was not remarried. The sworn statements of the parents of the deceased were recorded by the Commissioner. They did not have a case that their son's wife is not entitled to the apportioned award amount on account of her remarriage. There is no evidence that during the pendency of the proceedings before the Commissioner or at any time before it the f...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendran Vs. the State of Kerala and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-18-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2889; 1994LC651(Kerala)
Sujata V. Manohar, C.J.1. The petitioner is the brother of Pallipadathu Rameshan, S/o Madhavan, Pallipadathu House, Calicut, who has been detained under Section 3(1) (i) and (iii) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of the Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the COFEPOSA Act').2. The detenu had been working in Dubai as a Mechanic from 1979 to 1983. The detenu has stated in his statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act. which is subsequently retracted, that in September, 1992 he was approached by one Mohammad of Nilambur, who was working as a Manager in a Company at Dubai, where the detenu had previously worked. Mohammad came to the detenu's house and asked him whether he was willing to go to Dubai on a transit visa and bring gold from there to India. The detenu was promised a return air-ticket from Calicut to Sharjah and a sum oi'Rs. 5,000/- as remuneration. Acordingly, the detenu went from Calicut to Dubai on 19th October, 1992. He met M...
Tag this Judgment!Sadasivan Nair Vs. the Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Home ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-18-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1235
ORDERP.A. Mohammed, J.1. The petitioner is a canvassing agent of Customs Cargo clearing agency known as 'Arista Skyship Agencies'. The substantial prayer in this writ petition is to restrain the respondents from executing the order of detention passed against the petitioner under Section 3(l)(ii) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The Officers of the Directorate of Intelligence, Trivandrum intercepted consignment of vegetables to be exported to Abudhabi, at Trivandrum Airport on 25-9-1993. The examination of the consignment revealed foreign currencies of different countries to the value of Rs. 2 crores and Indian currency of about Rs. 16 lakhs concealed in polythene bags. Exporter of the consignment is Sri K.P. Mohammed Ashraf, Proprietor of M/s Bismi Exporters, Taliparamba and in his presence the foreign currencies as well as the Indian currency were recovered. Sri K. P. Mohammed Ashraf was...
Tag this Judgment!A.M. Ismail and ors. Etc. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Ker1
ORDERK.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. In these two original petitions, order passed by the District Magistrate under Section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act is challenged. Petitioners also challenge the Constitutional validity of Section 16(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act so far as it confers jurisdiction on the District Magistrate.2. The facts in short are as follows : Petitioners are residents of Edayirickapuzha in Kangazha village. The 6th respondent in O. P. 1038 of 1993-W is conducting a Rubber Factory near the Public Health Centre at Edayirickapuzha, as there was low voltage he sought a High Tension line to this area for increasing the voltage. The Assistant Executive Engineer made a proposal to augument the voltage and a 11 K. V. line was sought to be drawn through the properties of the petitioners. Petitioners and others raised objection and the Assistant Executive Engineer referred the matter to the District Magistrate. The District Magistrate passed an order on 14-12-92. Petitioners ...
Tag this Judgment!K.V. Francis Vs. T. Karunakaran Nambiar and ors.
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-17-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Ker285
ORDERK.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. Petitioner seeks to issue a writ of quo warranto calling upon the first respondent to show cause to satisfy as under what authority he is holding the post of Additional Advocate General (Taxes) of the State. According to the petitioner, the first respondent was not appointed pursuant to a decision taken by the Cabinet. It is contended that on 22nd July, 1994 there was a meeting of the council of Ministers prescribed over by the Chief Minister but the appointment of first respondent was not in the agenda and, therefore, no discussion took place in the meeting of the council of Ministers regarding the appointment of the first respondent. The further case of the petitioner is that the second respondent, the Chief Secretary, Government of Kerala forwarded the name of the first respondent to the Governor of Kerala as a Cabinet decision for issuing appointment order under Article 165(1) of the Constitution of India. Petitioner relies on certain newspaper reports ...
Tag this Judgment!N.V. Antony Vs. Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Thrissur an ...
Court: Kerala
Decided on: Aug-12-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Ker39
ORDERK. Narayana Kurup, J. 1. Heard learned Govt. Pleader also.2. Delay defeats the rights of parties has come true in this case. The petitioner submitted his nomination to contest the electionto the managing committee of the 4th respondent co-operative society. The election notification was published on 15-7-1994. 21-7-1994 was the last date for submission of nominations and 22-7-1994 was the date fixed for scrutiny of nomination and election is scheduled to be held on 14-8-1994. The petitioner submitted his nomination on 21-7-1994. It was rejected by the second respondent Returning Officer as per Ext. PI stating that the petitioner's nomination is not liable to be accepted since he is a defaulter to the society. Ext. P1 is dated 22-7-1994. On receipt of Ext. P1, the petitioner filed Ext. P3 representation before the Asst. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Thalappilly and also before the Joint Registrar. According to the petitioner, he is not a defaulter. On the other band, he is on...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »